On June 13, 2017 a
Request,Application
was filed
involving a dispute between
Money Source Inc,
and
Atlantis At The Oasis Neighborhood Assn, Inc,
Oasis Community Homeowners Association, Inc.,
Petorak, Bryan T,
for RPMF -Homestead ($50,001 - $249,999)
in the District Court of Miami-Dade County.
Preview
Filing # 57691805 E-Filed 06/13/2017 02:34:36 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIVIL ACTION
THE MONEY SOURCE INC.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
BRYAN T. PETORAK et al,
Defendant(s).
/
1, Plaintiff, The Money Source Inc., requests, pursuant to Rule 1.370(a) of the Florida Rules of Civil
Procedure, that Defendant, Bryan T. Petorak, admit the truth of the following matters and the genuineness of the
documents described in the request within the time prescribed by the governing Rule:
2. The copy of the promissory note attached to Plaintiff's Complaint is a correct copy of the original
instrument executed by Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak (hereinafter, the “Note”).
3. The Note executed by Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak is genuine.
4. Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak executed the Note on 8/5/2015.
5. The interest rate charged under the Note was normal and fair given the creditworthiness of Bryan
T. Petorak at the time the loan was applied for.
6. Plaintiff was the holder of the Note before the Complaint was filed in this action.
7. Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak did not pay the installment due on the Note on 09/01/2016.
8. Failure to pay the installments as they become due constitutes an event of default under the explicit
terms of the Note.
9. Prior to the inception of this foreclosure action, Plaintiff or its servicer delivered a written notice to
Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak that Defendant(s) had breached the terms of the Note and/or Mortgage
(hereinafter, “Breach Letter”).
10. Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak received the Breach Letter prior to the filing of the initial
Complaint.
1. The Breach Letter met the notice requirements mandated by the Note and/or Mortgage.
12. Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak did not make any payments subsequent to the default.
13. Plaintiff elected to accelerate payment of the balance.
14, The balance due on the Note is $169913.69,
15. Interest is due on the note from August 1, 2016.
16. On or about the same date as the execution of the Note, Bryan T. Petorak also executed a mortgage.
17. The copy of the mortgage attached to Plaintiff's Complaint is a correct copy of the original
instrument executed by Bryan T. Petorak (hereinafter, the “Mortgage”.
18. The Mortgage executed by Bryan T. Petorak is genuine.19, Plaintiff is entitled to exercise its rights as holder of the note by foreclosing the mortgage lien as
such is incident to the indebtedness.
20. The property described in the Mortgage was owned by Bryan T. Petorak when the Mortgage was
executed.
21. Bryan T. Petorak was in possession of the property described in the Mortgage when the Mortgage
was executed.
22. Bryan T. Petorak now owns the property described in the Mortgage.
23. Plaintiff retained Albertelli Law to represent it in this action.
24, Plaintiff agreed to pay Albertelli Law a reasonable fee for its services in this action.
By?
Gavin Vargas, Esq,
Flotid: No. 1
orida Bar No e L. Carlos , Esq.
Florida Bar #99338
KL - 17-010159 - L10002
Document Filed Date
June 13, 2017
Case Filing Date
June 13, 2017
Category
RPMF -Homestead ($50,001 - $249,999)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
Filing # 57691805 E-Filed 06/13/2017 02:34:36 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION THE MONEY SOURCE INC., Plaintiff, vs. BRYAN T. PETORAK et al, Defendant(s). / 1, Plaintiff, The Money Source Inc., requests, pursuant to Rule 1.370(a) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, that Defendant, Bryan T. Petorak, admit the truth of the following matters and the genuineness of the documents described in the request within the time prescribed by the governing Rule: 2. The copy of the promissory note attached to Plaintiff's Complaint is a correct copy of the original instrument executed by Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak (hereinafter, the “Note”). 3. The Note executed by Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak is genuine. 4. Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak executed the Note on 8/5/2015. 5. The interest rate charged under the Note was normal and fair given the creditworthiness of Bryan T. Petorak at the time the loan was applied for. 6. Plaintiff was the holder of the Note before the Complaint was filed in this action. 7. Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak did not pay the installment due on the Note on 09/01/2016. 8. Failure to pay the installments as they become due constitutes an event of default under the explicit terms of the Note. 9. Prior to the inception of this foreclosure action, Plaintiff or its servicer delivered a written notice to Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak that Defendant(s) had breached the terms of the Note and/or Mortgage (hereinafter, “Breach Letter”). 10. Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak received the Breach Letter prior to the filing of the initial Complaint. 1. The Breach Letter met the notice requirements mandated by the Note and/or Mortgage. 12. Bryan T. Petorak and Bryan T. Petorak did not make any payments subsequent to the default. 13. Plaintiff elected to accelerate payment of the balance. 14, The balance due on the Note is $169913.69, 15. Interest is due on the note from August 1, 2016. 16. On or about the same date as the execution of the Note, Bryan T. Petorak also executed a mortgage. 17. The copy of the mortgage attached to Plaintiff's Complaint is a correct copy of the original instrument executed by Bryan T. Petorak (hereinafter, the “Mortgage”. 18. The Mortgage executed by Bryan T. Petorak is genuine.19, Plaintiff is entitled to exercise its rights as holder of the note by foreclosing the mortgage lien as such is incident to the indebtedness. 20. The property described in the Mortgage was owned by Bryan T. Petorak when the Mortgage was executed. 21. Bryan T. Petorak was in possession of the property described in the Mortgage when the Mortgage was executed. 22. Bryan T. Petorak now owns the property described in the Mortgage. 23. Plaintiff retained Albertelli Law to represent it in this action. 24, Plaintiff agreed to pay Albertelli Law a reasonable fee for its services in this action. By? Gavin Vargas, Esq, Flotid: No. 1 orida Bar No e L. Carlos , Esq. Florida Bar #99338 KL - 17-010159 - L10002